Independent Thinker

indepentent_thinker Yoqadi 0 OP

Leave stereotypes, doubt 'truths', question everything, think independent & free.
Welcome to the Independent Thinker.
Feedback: @indepthinker_fbck_bot
All posts:
Kanal tili va GEOsi
ko'rsatilmagan, Ingliz tili

Muallifga yozish
Kanalning GEOsi
Kanal tili
Ingliz tili
Indeksga qo'shilgan
20.04.2018 20:37
So'nggi yangilash
14.08.2018 19:17
1 ta nashr qamrovi
kunlik qamrov
oy / post
tsitatalash indeksi
So'nggi nashlar
Independent Thinker 22 Jul, 19:28
There're so many words today and recently on women's liberation from stupid stereotypes and social roles like a household keeper, birth-giving machine, submissive wife, a wife at all, including stereotypes about appearance and choice of career.

But there's so little or close to none of words on men's liberation. The XXI century, omnipresent wireless, fantastic and limitless technologies, high-speed information flow, the Earth as a big village, the unconditional basic income concept but....

"a man is a warrior";
"must be strong";
"must fight";
"must provide";
"ready to sacrifice (himself)";
"must be fearless";
"men don't cry";
"men don't feel pain";
"real man always takes risks";
and so on.

But no, if women don't owe anything to anybody, neither do men. Why, say, should a man compromise his life by getting into a fight "defending honor" of a female he doesn't know?

Those prehistoric man's roles, they must go already. Of course, if a man does need to get microconcussions in the gym, shoot and get shot, receive injuries and/or disabilities - screw him, let him follow this way; but other men don't belong to this choice, they don't owe following this path of savage.

One's life is too worthy to be exchanged for stupid (read: uncalculated) risk, disability, traumas, getting into troubles without a cause, or other similar forms of serving "a motherland" or an abstract collective "Lady".
🚺 2
Independent Thinker 11 Jun, 06:59
Some say it's more important to ask the right questions than to give the right answers.

An interesting thing to think about is human names. We have a strange situation nowadays when we have a quite limited list of other people's names, names from ancient cultures, destroyed empires, foreign languages, pervert emperors, kings, and queens, and so on.

If one, suddenly, decides that their real name is, say, "Zong Tek", it will not be allowed. Why? Well, yes, this 'why' here is very interesting to think about. "Because it sounds strange"? Not according to 'tradition'? Those 'answers' are pathetic, designed by and fit to sheeple only.

In fact, the freedom to choose any name for themselves is a very basic right of a person. If we can't name ourselves the way we, and only we, want, what other rights can we talk about at all.

Independent Thinker 23 May, 12:15
It's clear it's comedy and is supposed to be laughed at, but in fact there's much more in it than just fun.

🎥 2
Independent Thinker 10 May, 01:00
These days, in May, 73 years ago the WW2 ended in Europe, officially. But The War did not, men continued on to kill each other for no freaking reason in June, July, and August of 1945. And then the Cold War started. And then the Korean War, then the Nam, and on and on. "War, war never changes" (c) Fallout 4.
I shit and piss and spit on all celebrations about "the victory over the Nazis". There's nothing to celebrate, because of the price, mostly. Millions of people had died by then, millions of possible inventors, musicians, writers, painters and other talented and just good people wouldn't ever be born because of those immense casualtues.
With that WW2 humanity signed its own death warrant - dozens of millions were exterminated badly for no particular reason - there was no invasion of aliens from the outer space, no rise of the machines to repel.
People were killing each other for signs, words in books, lines on the map, pieces of colored cloth (aka "flags") etc.
Only a fool can celebrate anything about it.

Independent Thinker 24 Apr, 00:40
Independent Thinker 24 Apr, 00:40
Independent Thinker 17 Apr, 00:33
✏️ Despite possible looking heroic, it's absurd to try to confront 'The System' (for whatever reasons one may wish to confront it).
You will not win if you fight it. It is immensely bigger, it has lots of slaves who you don't want to know, it's everywhere, and... it provides for you.
Yes, it does. Think about shops, malls, transportation system, utilities, whatever that enables you to live where you live with comfort - it's all provided by 'The System', isn't it.
So it's not black-versus-white; and it's, actually, never black against white.
No, "fighting the System" is a deadend.
You don't have to like the system (let alone to love it, that's only for perverts), all it takes is to use it, to learn how to feed off it. It is possible but the 1st condition for that is stopping this useless "fight against it".
No need for fighting/submitting, hating/loving - the true attitude can be somewhere in the neutral.

Independent Thinker 25 Mar, 02:28
✏️ Today I don't see much of a point in reading books about self development. Anything about self development, actually - articles, blog posts, videos, movies, etc.

The thing is that I'm not against those things, they're fine. It's just the clear fact that I believe I've already heard all those wise words, there's nothing more to add. And I already know what is going to be said, nothing new for me - I heard it 10 years ago.

Sometimes there comes a moment when one understands: time for listening/reading outer sources of information is over, there'll be no new words anymore; and it's now the time to listen to the inner source of information. Yes, the listen-to-yourself advice.

It's surprisingly quite hard but the only way to go - all answers on all things area already here, within our minds. The problem is that noone's ever taught us how to use our minds, we now have to figure it out by themselves through trial and error.

Independent Thinker 15 Mar, 02:32

Everybody must have a hobby, some kind of activity that is not really related to the mundane daily routine aka "the real life". Be it learning foreign (or, better, constructed) languages, weekend fishing, playing a musical instrument, sewing, drawing/painting, writing poems or stories - whatever.

No, the thing here is not "becoming a famous musician/painter AND earning a lot of money". This is not what that's all about.

The thing is your mind. If one doesn't really have any hobbies, doesn't even play video/online/browser games, and all they know is nothing but the home-job-home routine, then by the age of, like, 30 that person will show visible signs of mental deterioration.

For a mind to exist as long as possible, there must be a challenge which makes it burn with passion - something relatively hard but highly enjoyable.

And this is not a game of hobby, actually, it's very serious. Ignore hobbies, and by the age of 35 you'll find yourself in a very degraded state of mind and, thus, everything in your life. Go hobby, in a word. Learn a new language, for a start.

Independent Thinker 25 Feb, 01:21

When someone says "we" and "ours" referring to their "nation", "country", "external policy", "national traditions" etc, be sure he/she is a spiritually blind, mentally enslaved, narrow-minded individual.

"We ruled half of the world", says someone from the UK. No, that person hasn't ruled shit in his/her life. It was the ruling class, the nobility gang, that actually ruled, enslaved, exploited the rest.

"We launched the first man into space", says someone from the ex-USSR. No, idiot, you haven't launched anything anywhere. It was the Soviet scientists who did that (presumably using some Nazi technology).

"We did this", "we fought that"... A person saying this sees him-/herself as a tiny part of a giant Hive Mind aka "a nation". Very similar to ants or rats.

There's no "we". Screw "we". I don't want to be a part of "the We".

Independent Thinker 17 Feb, 01:39
posting once a week seems like a good pace, so far #announcements


Whenever I see a person in a military uniform, I think "Fuck you, murderer!"
No, they, the uniforms, aren't "defenders". They are The Cause of war. The very fact of their existance causes wars. Remove those motherfuckers - and most of wars will stop immediately. There'll be noone to fight, noone to pull the trigger.
Just spend a couple of minutes of your life on thinking about those who chose to be "professional militaries". Who are they? They have nothing better to do except signing up for "a state's" cause to... to do what? To kill, right. That's their task. And they have "orders" there, so if according to "an order" they'll have to kill you, they'll do that. Without a freaking blinking of an eye, that's just their "order", after all, that's it. "I was just following orders", they all say afterwards. Meaning "That's not me, that's them, those who issue the orders".
No, you piece of shit. It's YOU, a nameless soldier, who's the problem. Those who issue orders just issue them. It's you who pulls the trigger, nobody else.
So, you, a reader reading these lines, do know your problem now - it's your military neighbour and his (mostly "his", sometimes "her") family. It's them who are to be wiped out from this Earth.

Independent Thinker 9 Feb, 23:40
✏️ In order to keep the mind's sanity and impartiality, everything one knows must be questioned.

The ongoing continuous reassessment of one's beliefs is a necessity and form of mental hygiene.

If that is not done, eventually one's mind will take any side, and once it's taken, a mind is servant to a belief and no longer free.

This is a feat of intellect, however. It's not easy to always balance on constantly changing waves of opinions, news etc. It does take courage and will.

It's way more easier to just relax and choose a wave and flow down the river on it.
But this is all about what thoughts you'll be having before you actually die - have I been trying to break throught the artificial curtain that inhibited my consciousness; or have I just gone with the flow, doing a menial job, thinking what I am supposed to think, having my own core of personal existance obliterated almost completely being replaced by some stereotypes no-one-knows-who actually made up?

Independent Thinker 2 Feb, 01:17
✏️"Cherchez La Femme" vs "Cherchez L'Argent"

There's this cliche phrase supposedly coined by Alexander Dumas long ago, meaning "look for the woman", as in "There is a woman in every case; as soon as someone brings me a report, I say, 'Look for the woman!'" ("The Mohicans of Paris", 1854).

To my view, that's too fictional. What's real, is not "cherchez la femme" but "cherchez l'argent", that is "look for money".

Meaning that behind ANYTHING, especially something global, there's someone's financial interest. Behind any "war for independence", "revolution", "war for liberation", "patriotic effort", "coup d'etat" etc there's always the interest of a capitalist pig craving for even more money/profit/%. And there's no other way about it, this is the only thing that is fundamental. And those "someones" always have particular names, children, wives, property, address, businesses etc, and - they never go to no war, no matter how right "the cause" is.

Literally, every war is never "just a war", it's always someone's business expansion.

And the patriotic blabbering, it's intended for and gladly consumed by commoners who, sadly, keep being ready to kill each other for nothing but the financial interest of someone else.

And I don't know who deserves to be hated more - capitalist pigs or sheeple who keep killing each other for the sake of the latter.

Independent Thinker 30 Jan, 20:16

We've been mislead greatly about the fundamental concepts from the Bible. "Love", "forgiveness", "piety", and many many other words which we now don't even understand.

"Love", for example. What kind of "love" does the Bible actually talk about, what is actually behind the word itself, in the meaning part? There have been many translations from those texts of the ancient, and we're not quite told about the very word(s) that was lately translated with "love". There must have been something different there, at least not as stupid as the contemporary explanation of "love". This explanation is nothing but a sure way to become a pussy, victim, underachiever, loser etc.

Or "forgiveness". The explanation(s) we know from the translations themselves and related interpretations offer us a lousy picture where Evil always triumphs and Good always looses. What exactly was in the place of this word lately translated as "to forgive"?

I suspect, today we'd say something like "disconnect (from the person)", or "accept the situation". Maybe that's much close, but still, without an adequate translation of the Bible into modern English all those texts will keep being nothing but an unclear message.

Independent Thinker 28 Jan, 06:35
✏️ Despite all the knowledge and understanding how things seem to work behind the curtain, reasonable thinking, and all that - it's still easy to give in to emotions of grief, despair, and melancholy. Emotions in the key of Minor.

And, strangely, it feels natural this way, feels like home - an old, shabby house which looks poor but feels quite comfortable to stay in. Even enjoyable, in a certain sense.

Sometimes the key of Minor starts to play without a reason, sometimes there's one.

In both cases cheering up isn't that effective, at times it only makes things worse.

Assumably, one just has to let the Minor key play it till the end. And after it finishes, there may be transition to Major (or may not).

The "Don't-Fight-It-Let-It-Pass" method of dealing with depression, so to say.

Independent Thinker 27 Jan, 18:20

I consider myself a misanthropist, but that doesn't mean I'm socially awkward and/or can't talk to people.

I'm completely fine with people. I love having an intelligent conversation with someone. I don't have dreams where I'm killing or torturing people.

Misanthropy is not about having a serial killer mentality or being one.

It's about the attitude to the humankind. I personally believe it's rather failed. Two world wars, the never ending vicious circle of violence, inequality, combativeness - all this and more, what does it make the humankind? Someone's failed project, I'd say. And this is pretty much it.

On the other hand, it's curious what name can be used to describe a person who "likes the humankind but has problems with interacting with other people".

Independent Thinker 25 Jan, 20:59
Independent Thinker 25 Jan, 20:59
✏ Someone says something we don't like and what happens next? We rush forward and fight another opinion with arguments ("arrrgh!uments"). We feel we need to disprove opinions we thinks are false.
Why do we do that? Believably, because of our animal nature and the yearning for dominance.
The point of doing that? Mostly it's negatively effective to try to convince someone.
Everyone believes what they like to believe, and if facts contradict with faith, screw the facts. Thus it's nearly impossible to force someone to really change the way of thinking.
And it's negatively effective because mostly we lose something after arguing - either our mood gets down, or we lose a friend.
And moreover, to think that it's only our opinion which is true is quite naive and overconfident.

Independent Thinker 23 Jan, 13:41

A god is not a creator. A god usually rules and is worshipped.
To understand what a god is, imagine one buys a formicarium. Ants live there as a society, they eat, sleep, work, reproduce, while the owner of the formicarium provides them ("his chosen people") with food for free ("manna"), takes care of their habitat ("the promised land"), and generally enjoys watching the ants live. The owner of the formicarium is literally the god to those ants.
But did the owner actually create anything - ants themselves, the formicarium, food etc? No, but still, ants' lives depend on the owner completely.
So, even you, reader, can be a god, though only for inferior species (livestock, for instance).

Another type of a god is of different nature.
When a group of people starts thinking the sameor similar thoughts and following the same rules, a new special entity is... born. It's traditionally called "an egregore", it doesn't have a physical body, although it may have many representations of itself - idols, monuments, pictures, symbols etc, and it does define its people's existance. However, this type of a god depends on his people as well, namely, it needs people's psychic (and/or mental) energy to feed and grow on - prayers, hymns, hard labor, thoughts, efforts and so on. Usually, but not always, gods like that need their flock to increase in number - it means more "food", more power and influence.
Gods like that are very numerous and different in "size" - from a world religion and "a nation", down to a small isolated community or a school class, these are all gods. And since most of them are proactive and need to grow, they do fight between themselves sometimes, and they have a lot of followers to send into battle who usually gladly kill each other to their gods' pleasure and glory.

Independent Thinker 20 Jan, 15:01

"The creator" is usually used interchangeably with "the god" but these 2 words actually mean different things.
A creator, or, rather, the Creator (can there be "the creators"?) is an entity that is behind everything, the one that literally brought everything into existence. Of course it's very archaic and naive to use "he" (or "she") describing it. Just as it is childlike to imagine it as an antropomorphic being, wearing a crown, toga, sitting on a throne etc.
What, to my imagination, is more appropriate is describing it as "the highest intellect", the H.I.
We can understand this idea imagining the future artificial intelligence which will be omnipresent and omniscient. But the A.I. still needs "the body", or rather bodies - the wide variety of devices to function on/in/from.
Whereas the HI doesn't need any "devices" as such, it just exists everywhere and everywhen.
And actually the very word "the creator" is innacurate because if there's a creator there must be a destroyer (as there's obviously the process of destruction inexistence), and then we come to the classic conception (rather misconception) of "The God VS The Devil" which is more of a tale than reasonable thinking.
So yes, the H.I. it is.